David Gregory Under Police Investigation Over Gun Magazine On 'Meet The Press'

I found this to be hilarious, and I hope he is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

David Gregory Under Police Investigation Over Gun Magazine On 'Meet The Press'

Posted: 12/26/2012 9:16 am EST | Updated: 12/26/2012 1:41 pm EST

UPDATE: NBC News had requested and was denied permission to use a high capacity magazine on "Meet the Press." Legal Insurrection's William A. Jacobson looked into an email allegedly from the Metropolitan Police Department which said that the network contacted the police before the segment. The MPD's Aziz Alali confirmed it, telling Jacobson:

"NBC contacted the Metropolitan Police Department inquiring if they could utilize a high capacity magazine for this segment. NBC was informed that that possession of a high capacity magazine is not permissible and the request was denied."

EARLIER: David Gregory is being investigated by police over the gun magazine that he showed on Sunday's "Meet the Press."

Gregory held up what appeared to be a 30-round gun magazine during his contentious interview with the NRA's Wayne LaPierre. He was asking LaPierre whether fewer victims would have died in the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School if the gunman had not had access to so many bullets.

Araz Alali, police officer and spokesman, confirmed to Politico on Tuesday that the Metropolitan Police Department is looking into “The 'Meet the Press,' David Gregory incident.” "There are D.C. code violations, D.C. code restrictions on guns, ammunition. We are investigating this matter. Beyond the scope of that, I can’t comment any further," he said.

The code in question says, “No person in the District shall possess, sell, or transfer any large capacity ammunition feeding device regardless of whether the device is attached to a firearm," and has been mentioned by numerous conservatives making the argument against Gregory.

CORRECTION: The headline has been updated to say that Gregory was holding a gun magazine, not a clip, on "Meet the Press.

It's your dumbass hypothetical, not mine. If it sounds absurd to you well then I am glad you caught up even if you did have to take the long route to reason.

__________________
“You may think RaiderH8r is just a thinker. But I’m not just a thinker. I’m a doer. Every day I go out there, and rev that engine, fire it up, grab a hold of that line between speed and chaos, and wrestle it to the ground like a demon cobra. And when the fear rises up in my belly, I use it. Fear is powerful, because it’s been there for billions of years. And it is good. And I use it. And I ride it; I ride it like a skeleton horse through the gates of hell.”

Washington Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier seems to think that gun-control laws don’t apply to the liberal elite. The police chief helped Sen. Dianne Feinstein acquire “assault weapons,” which are illegal to possess in the District, for a news conference early this year to promote a ban on these firearms, then tried to cover up the police involvement.

Now, a response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request reveals Chief Lanier’s shocking willingness to bend the rules for partisan and ideological purposes.

Feinstein wants guns

Lobbyist Chuck DeWitt emailed Chief Lanier on Christmas Eve last year. “Sen. Feinstein has asked us to bring examples of assault weapons used in the worst incidents over the past few years.” The CEO of the Lafayette Group told the chief that the guns would be put on display at a media event and asked, “Could you put me in touch with your person who would have any of these weapons?”

Since Cmdr. Williams did not have all the firearms the senator sought, Mr. DeWitt asked Philadelphia police to provide the missing ones, which meant bringing “the P15 and the Glock extended magazine” to Washington.

All of these firearms are illegal in the city — even on federal property — owing to the District’s law banning rifles with a detachable magazine and such features as a pistol grip or folding stock and all firearms with a magazines capacity of more than 10 rounds.

Lanier's coverup

Chief Lanier wanted to help Mrs. Feinstein, but didn’t want the media to know.

Cmdr. Williams emailed Mr. Mentzer to put a “bug” in his ear that the police would “prefer that no mention of the fact that the weapons came from D.C. or were recovered by MPDC in the official language or speeches.” Mr. Mentzer replied, “By not mentioning where the weapons came from, we open ourselves up to the same charge against David Gregory.”

He was referring to the anchor of NBC’s “Meet the Press,” who knowingly procured an illegal 30-round magazine in the District as a stunt for his TV show, but was not charged.

Kathryn Stillman, the campus-access coordinator for Mr. Gainer, emailed Cmdr. Williams and Mrs. Feinstein’s staff to recommend the firearms be mounted on a board with zip ties so that Mrs. Feinstein could “point or even touch, but no need for any particular handling.” This was to ensure that it could be argued later that the senator never had “possession” of the illegal guns.

Coverup unravels

After seeing the weapons on display at the press event, I asked Mr. Gainer’s office about the legality and was told that the firearms were the property of the D.C. and Philadelphia police departments. A spokesman for Mrs. Feinstein, Brian Weiss, told me that his office ”coordinated” with the police and that “the weapons were under Washington MPD possession the entire time.”

But when I asked Chief Lanier’s spokesman, Gwendolyn Crump, about the guns, she refused to confirm they belonged to MPD. I followed up the next day with several more questions to Ms. Crump.

From the FOIA documents, I now know that she sent my second email to Chief Lanier, who then forwarded it to three people with notes.

Chief Lanier wrote to Philadelphia Police Chief Charles H. Ramsey, “I am really disappointed in Terry [Gainer]. This is exactly why I didn’t want to participate.” She said to Mr. Gainer, “This is completely contrary to our agreement to participate in this event. We will not participate again.”

The chief wrote to lobbyist Mr. DeWitt, “So much for our agreement.” Mr. DeWitt replied: “Well, Ramsey and Feinstein followed our script, but who would have guessed that [Gainer] would burn us.” He drafted a response for the police to send to me and added in a note, “I don’t know how you put up with people like Emily ... .” Chief

Lanier replied, “Thanks, Chuck, unfortunately this will be the next tail wagging our dog for weeks.”

No special favors for Republicans

A week after Mrs. Feinstein’s publicity stunt, Republican Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina were refused permission to bring a hunting rifle and an AR-style rifle to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Mrs. Feinstein’s “assault weapon” ban.

The Republican senators sent a letter of complaint to committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy, but were still forced to use just a photo of a standard wooden hunting rifle with a plastic pistol grip at the hearing in order to demonstrate that simply adding the ergonomic feature transformed the gun into one that would be illegal under her ban.

Mrs. Feinstein’s staff gloated: “I was gratified to hear Sens. Cruz and Graham complaining that getting weapons into their hearing today was ‘unworkable,’” Mr. Mentzer emailed Cmdr. Williams and another officer with a news story about the Republicans not being able bring in even a legal rifle. “I find you guys ENTIRELY practical, for the record.”

The police have yet to turn over a majority of the documents I requested. The FOIA officer wrote that she was “still searching” and “will release them, if any are located.”

The police stonewalling and cover-up are so that the public doesn’t find out that Chief Lanier enforces laws differently in the District, depending on whether you are a powerful liberal who opposes Second Amendment rights, like Mr. Gregory and Mrs. Feinstein, or an average American.

Emily Miller is a senior editor of opinion for The Washington Times and author of “Emily Gets Her Gun” (Regnery, 2013).

MILLER: D.C. police help get firearms to National Cathedral for event to promote gun control

The highly restrictive firearms laws in Washington, D.C., are enforced differently depending on your status and political position on gun control.
Once again, the D.C. police are using their resources to provide illegal guns for a public relations stunt intended to pressure politicians to pass federal restrictions on the Second Amendment.

Outside the Washington National Cathedral on Sunday, blacksmiths will "forge firearms into garden tools" as a symbolic enactment of this year's theme, "Swords into Plowshares."

The Children's Defense Fund, which is cosponsoring the event, said in a press release that blacksmiths will be using "illegal guns confiscated by the police."

The dramatic scene will follows a children's church service in which the organization's president Marian Wright Edelman will speak.

It is illegal in the District to possess a firearm that is not registered. When asked about the event, Police Chief Cathy Lanier's spokesman said that, "These are not firearms. They are scrap parts only, and they are inoperable."

That's actually legally irrelevant. According to the District firearms laws written after the Supreme Court's Heller decision in 2008, even a non-functioning firearm must be registered and can result in criminal liability.

The chairman of the Fraternal Order of Police for D.C., Kris Baumann, disagrees with the department participating in this event.

"We are supposed to be the police and, as such, the laws must be applied to everyone without bias," the head of the 3,600 member union told me Friday. "The minute we become politicized in how we enforce the law, we become compromised and we lose public trust. This is not rocket science, and yet there appears to be no learning curve on this issue."

He's referring to two cases of Chief Lanier using her power to help gun-control advocates. David Gregory of NBC News possessed an illegal 30-round magazine in an interview in December 2012 with National Rifle Association (NRA) CEO Wayne LaPierre, but the anchor was never arrested or charged.

Also, Chief Lanier provided confiscated guns for a press conference in January at Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s request. As I reported in a column last week, Mrs. Feinstein used the weapons set by D.C. police on a pegboard as a backdrop to push for a new federal "assault weapon" ban for rifles with one feature like a pistol grip.

Using a Freedom of Information Act request, I uncovered emails between the chief, the senator's staff and the sergeant at arms office in which they coordinated how to transfer the weapons, without technically breaking laws for which civilians have been jailed.

The dean of the Cathedral, the Rev. Gary Hall, spoke at Mrs. Feinstein's media event. Wearing a clerical collar and standing in front of the illegal guns, he said that, "I can no longer justify a society that allows people other than military and police to own weapons like these."

The NRA sent an email to its members about the event at the cathedral: "We believe that overbroad laws unequally enforced to advance a political agenda constitute an abuse of authority. If MPD is to carve out exceptions to D.C.'s draconian gun-control laws to avoid absurd and unjust consequences, hopefully it will do so on an equal opportunity basis."

The organization added, "Better yet, hopefully the D.C. Council, or the U.S. Congress, will finally embrace the Second Amendment and reform D.C.'s unreasonable firearm laws."

No gun control law has ever reduced crime. Since they don't have facts on their side, advocates like the Rev. Hall, Mr. Gregory and Mrs. Feinstein resort to publicity stunts to attempt to persuade the public based on emotions.

Chief Lanier should spend more time focusing on the increasing violent crime in the nation's capital and less on getting props for her political friends.

MILLER: D.C. businessman faces two years in jail for unregistered ammunition, brass casing

Mark Witaschek, a successful financial adviser with no criminal record, is facing two years in prison for possession of unregistered ammunition after D.C. police raided his house looking for guns. Mr. Witaschek has never had a firearm in the city, but he is being prosecuted to the full extent of the law. The trial starts on Nov. 4.

The police banged on the front door of Mr. Witaschek's Georgetown home at 8:20 p.m. on July 7, 2012, to execute a search warrant for "firearms and ammunition ... gun cleaning equipment, holsters, bullet holders and ammunition receipts."

D.C. law requires residents to register every firearm with the police, and only registered gun owners can possess ammunition, which includes spent shells and casings. The maximum penalty for violating these laws is a $1,000 fine and a year in jail.

Police based their search on a charge made by Mr. Witaschek's estranged wife, who had earlier convinced a court clerk to issue a temporary restraining order against her husband for threatening her with a gun, although a judge later found the charge to be without merit.

After entering the house, the police immediately went upstairs, pointed guns at the heads of Mr. Witaschek and his girlfriend, Bonnie Harris, and demanded they surrender, facedown and be handcuffed.

In recalling what followed, Mr. Witaschek became visibly emotional in describing how the police treated him, Ms. Harris and the four children in the house.

His 16-year-old son was in the shower when the police arrived. "They used a battering ram to bash down the bathroom door and pull him out of the shower, naked," said his father. "The police put all the children together in a room, while we were handcuffed upstairs. I could hear them crying, not knowing what was happening."

Police spokesman Gwendolyn Crump would not provide further information on the events in this case.

The police shut down the streets for blocks and spent more than two hours going over every inch of his house. "They tossed the place," said Mr. Witaschek. He provided photos that he took of his home after the raid to document the damage, which he estimated at $10,000.

The police found no guns in the house, but did write on the warrant that four items were discovered: "One live round of 12-gauge shotgun ammunition," which was an inoperable shell that misfired during a hunt years earlier. Mr. Witaschek had kept it as a souvenir. "One handgun holster" was found, which is perfectly legal.

"One expended round of .270 caliber ammunition," which was a spent brass casing. The police uncovered "one box of Knight bullets for reloading." These are actually not for reloading, but are used in antique-replica, single-shot, muzzle-loading rifles.

This was the second police search of his home. Exactly one month earlier, Mr. Witaschek allowed members of the "Gun Recovery Unit" access to search without a warrant because he thought he had nothing to hide.

After about an hour and a half, the police found one box of Winchester .40 caliber ammunition, one gun-cleaning kit (fully legal) and a Civil War-era Colt antique revolver that Mr. Witaschek kept on his office desk. The police seized the Colt even though antique firearms are legal and do not have to be registered.

Mr. Witaschek is a gun owner and an avid hunter. However, he stores his firearms at the home of his sister, Sylvia Witaschek, in suburban Arlington, Va.

Two weeks after the June raid, D.C. police investigators went to his sister's house — unaccompanied by Virginia police and without a warrant — and asked to "view" the firearms, according to a police report. She refused. The next day, the D.C. police returned to her house with the Arlington County police and served her with a criminal subpoena.

The Office of Attorney General of the District of Columbia Irvin Nathan signed an affidavit on Aug. 21, 2012, in support of a warrant to arrest Mr. Witaschek. A spokesman for Mr. Nathan would not comment on a pending case.

Mr. Witaschek went to the police station on Aug. 24 at 5:30 a.m. to turn himself in, but was not transferred to central booking until 11:30 a.m., at which time he was told it was too late to be arraigned that day. He spent the night in jail and was released the next day at 10 a.m.

Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier reserves such harsh tactics for ordinary citizens. When NBC News anchor David Gregory violated the gun-registration law last year by wielding an illegal 30-round magazine on live television, he was not arrested.

Mr. Nathan also gave Mr. Gregory a pass, writing that prosecuting him "would not promote public safety."

Mr. Nathan, who is unelected, showed no such leniency to Mr. Witaschek. In September 2012, the attorney general offered Mr. Witaschek a deal to plead guilty to one charge of unlawful possession of ammunition with a penalty of a year of probation, a $500 fine and a contribution to a victims' fund.

Mr. Witaschek turned down the offer. "It's the principle," he told me.

To increase the pressure a year later, Mr. Nathan tacked on an additional charge in August of illegal ammunition from the first, warrantless search. Mr. Witaschek chose to accept the risk of prison time by going to trial instead of pleading guilty.

The firearms laws in places such as the District of Columbia, Chicago, New York, Connecticut and New Jersey do nothing to reduce violence, but merely infringe on the Second Amendment rights of the law-abiding.

However, if these laws are going to be enforced, the police and government must treat everyone equally.

Mark Witaschek, a successful financial adviser with no criminal record, is facing two years in prison for possession of unregistered ammunition after D.C. police raided his house looking for guns. Mr. Witaschek has never had a firearm in the city, but he is being prosecuted to the full extent of the law. The trial starts on Nov. 4.

I haven't found anything about the ongoing trial of Witasheck. It started Nov 4th. I did see an update article with not much new info, but they posted copies of the DC laws that were used and a pic for clarity:

A Law Fit For a Police State

To understand just how draconian this prohibition is, we need to look at the law itself — which is almost unbelievable to someone unfamiliar with the police state in D.C. But here it is, according to D.C. Code § 7-2506.01:

(a) No person shall possess ammunition in the District of Columbia unless:
(1) He is a licensed dealer pursuant to subchapter IV of this unit;
(2) He is an officer, agent, or employee of the District of Columbia or the United States of America, on duty and acting within the scope of his duties when possessing such ammunition;
(3) He is the holder of the valid registration certificate for a firearm of the same gauge or caliber as the ammunition he possesses; except, that no such person shall possess restricted pistol bullets; or
(4) He holds an ammunition collector’s certificate on September 24, 1976.

This is one of the most oppressive ammunition laws in the country. Possessing something that arbitrary and innocuous in most parts of the USA will get a person a SWAT raid and prison time in Washington D.C. The “crime” doesn’t need to involve an actual firearm or any malicious behavior. Enforcers are exempt from the law, and anyone else must seek the district’s permission to exercise their “rights”.
But it gets worse. D.C. code has an interesting way of defining “ammunition.”
Per D.C. Code § 7-2501.01 (2), ammunition in Washington D.C. is defined as:

Most shooters consider “ammunition” to be the finished product of several components that is ready to be discharged. This would include a casing fitted with a primer, loaded with powder, clamped to a projectile. While a person can use basic tools to combine the components into a usable round of ammunition, the components themselves cannot be fired. For an idea of how a typical pistol round is configured, examine this diagram:

What is striking about the district’s definition is that it labels all of the separate components as “ammunition.” This means that the already-oppressive ammo ban was written in such a broad manner that it goes far beyond usable rounds of ammo. It was written to include things that couldn’t even be fired if the owner wanted to.

I haven't found anything about the ongoing trial of Witasheck. It started Nov 4th. I did see an update article with not much new info, but they posted copies of the DC laws that were used and a pic for clarity:

A Law Fit For a Police State

To understand just how draconian this prohibition is, we need to look at the law itself — which is almost unbelievable to someone unfamiliar with the police state in D.C. But here it is, according to D.C. Code § 7-2506.01:

(a) No person shall possess ammunition in the District of Columbia unless:
(1) He is a licensed dealer pursuant to subchapter IV of this unit;
(2) He is an officer, agent, or employee of the District of Columbia or the United States of America, on duty and acting within the scope of his duties when possessing such ammunition; (3) He is the holder of the valid registration certificate for a firearm of the same gauge or caliber as the ammunition he possesses; except, that no such person shall possess restricted pistol bullets; or
(4) He holds an ammunition collector’s certificate on September 24, 1976.

This is one of the most oppressive ammunition laws in the country. Possessing something that arbitrary and innocuous in most parts of the USA will get a person a SWAT raid and prison time in Washington D.C. The “crime” doesn’t need to involve an actual firearm or any malicious behavior. Enforcers are exempt from the law, and anyone else must seek the district’s permission to exercise their “rights”.
But it gets worse. D.C. code has an interesting way of defining “ammunition.”
Per D.C. Code § 7-2501.01 (2), ammunition in Washington D.C. is defined as:

Most shooters consider “ammunition” to be the finished product of several components that is ready to be discharged. This would include a casing fitted with a primer, loaded with powder, clamped to a projectile. While a person can use basic tools to combine the components into a usable round of ammunition, the components themselves cannot be fired. For an idea of how a typical pistol round is configured, examine this diagram:

What is striking about the district’s definition is that it labels all of the separate components as “ammunition.” This means that the already-oppressive ammo ban was written in such a broad manner that it goes far beyond usable rounds of ammo. It was written to include things that couldn’t even be fired if the owner wanted to.

So does my bolded part mean that an off duty cop can't have any ammo? If so what do they do issue you a certain quantity at the start of the shift?

I'm sure they would never bust a cop for it. Just like they chose not to bust a member of the media, or a special interest group, or a politician who agrees with their agenda. If you are "pro gun" then you don't get equal treatment.

__________________

"As I walked out the door toward the gate that would lead to my freedom, I knew if I didn't leave my bitterness and hatred behind I'd still be in prison."

MILLER: Prosecution rests in trial for D.C. man charged for one shotgun shell

Mark Witaschek faces six months in jail for unregistered ammunition but no gun

The District of Columbia has finished presenting its case on why Mark Witaschek is a danger to society for possessing a single shotgun shell and muzzleloader sabots in his home. This outrageous legal battle shows how far unelected, anti-gun liberals will go to attempt to destroy a man’s life.